“…in an amount up to $41 million as follows: (i) with respect to 4d Customers, approximately seven percent (7%) ($27.5 million) of the 4d Customers’ account balances, and with respect to 30.7 Customers, approximately forty-five percent (45%) ($13.5 million) of the 30.7 Customers’ account balances. If the motion is approved, the total interim distributions made to 4d Customers and 30.7 Customers will be approximately thirty-seven percent (37%) and eighty-five percent (85%) of their Allowed Futures Claims, respectively.”

All around, this is welcoming news, as any money getting back to its rightful owners is a definite step in the right direction; but did Mr. Bodenstein have to shoot so low?

The 30.7 balances (the amount of money held by customers in foreign currencies to trade futures on foreign exchanges) have more than enough money to make them whole, and Mr. Bodenstein himself said ““We anticipate that they’ll get close to all their money,”, but this distribution only takes them to 85% whole. If there’s a surplus there, why hold back 15%. And those with 4d balances (the bulk of the PFG business), are only getting another 7%, when that could have easily been as high as 20% by our estimates. So what’s the hold up? In our best Rounders accent – “Pay that man his money.”

The motion hearing is scheduled for next Wednesday (December 18th) In Chicago, and there doesn’t seem to be any reason for the judge to deny it; meaning customers could be getting a check before the banks are closed for Christmas, and should be getting one by the end of the year.

Comments

So this 7% disbursement is supposed to be of comfort? Seems to me that there is still massive discrepancy over total funds in this case. I´ve been going through paperwork on the http://www.PFGChapter7.com website, this is what I found.. THEIR figures, not mine….

According to the Trustee Cash Summary 11/15/2013 http://omnimgt.com/CMSVol/CMSDocs/pub_46535/399445_DRAFT.PFG%20Cash%20Summary.11.15.13.pdf there were recovered funds of 249million, of which so far 137 million have been distributed (123million to Vision, etc, plus others)… That leaves 111 million ? Why does the trustee say he only has 68 million in the court dockets? Also, on the same “Trustee Cash Summary 11/15/2013 it clearly confirms the 111 million left as bank balance….

More interesting is the fact that the “Cash Summary” ALSO confirms that there is 130million+ held at other financial institutions… Has this 130m “at other financial institutions” (mostly JP Morgan) been forgotten?

The level of communication is totally un-acceptable. By their own hand it would be confirmed above that there is 130m + another 40m+ that has not even been mentioned in the court papers. It´s all documented, why do the court get different figures from what they publish?

Sorry, I made a mistake on that message above. Apologies for my initial error.

The total cash on hand is 111m + 19m which are at other banks…. Total 130m. Never the less, the statement confirms 130million + of cash on hand.. Why do the court dockets state 68million attributable to Futures customers… It´s ALL our money.

If there is 130m then there is 130m, it´s certainly not the 68m mentioned to the court. Why are they allowing STOLEN Futures Client Money to be distributed elsewhere?

Search

Social Media

DISCLAIMER

Forex trading, commodity trading, managed futures, and other alternative investments are complex and carry a risk of substantial losses. As such, they are not suitable for all investors. You should not rely on any of the information as a substitute for the exercise of your own skill and judgment in making such a decision on the appropriateness of such investments.

The entries on this blog are intended to further subscribers understanding, education, and - at times - enjoyment of the world of alternative investments through managed futures, trading systems, and managed forex. Unless distinctly noted otherwise, the data and graphs included herein are intended to be mere examples and exhibits of the topic discussed, are for educational and illustrative purposes only, and do not represent trading in actual accounts. Opinions expressed are that of the author.

The mention of specific asset class performance (i.e. +3.2%, -4.6%) is based on the noted source index (i.e. Newedge CTA Index, S&P 500 Index, etc.), and investors should take care to understand that any index performance is for the constituents of that index only, and does not represent the entire universe of possible investments within that asset class. And further, that there can be limitations and biases to indices such as survivorship and self reporting biases, and instant history.

The performance data for various Commodity Trading Advisor ("CTA") and Commodity Pools are compiled from various sources, including Barclay Hedge, RCM's own estimates of performance based on account managed by advisors on its books, and reports directly from the advisors. These performance figures should not be relied on independent of the individual advisor's disclosure document, which has important information regarding the method of calculation used, whether or not the performance includes proprietary results, and other important footnotes on the advisor's track record.

The mention of general asset class performance (i.e. managed futures did well, stocks were down, bonds were up) is based on RCM’s direct experience in those asset classes, estimates of performance of dozens of CTAs followed by RCM, and averaging of various indices designed to track said asset classes.

The mention of market based performance (i.e. Corn was up 5% today) reflects all available information as of the time and date of the publication.

The owner of this blog, RCM Alternatives, may receive various forms of compensation from certain investment managers highlighted and/or mentioned within the blog, including but not limited to retaining: a portion of trade commissions, a portion of the fees charged to investors by the investment managers, a portion of the fees for operating a fund for the investment managers via affiliate Attain Portfolio Advisors, or via direct payment for marketing services.

Managed Futures Disclaimer:

Past Performance is Not Necessarily Indicative of Future Results. The regulations of the CFTC require that prospective clients of a managed futures program (CTA) receive a disclosure document when they are solicited to enter into an agreement whereby the CTA will direct or guide the client’s commodity interest trading and that certain risk factors be highlighted. The disclosure document contains a complete description of the principal risk factors and each fee to be charged to your account by the CTA.

Archives

RCM Alternatives

Disclaimer

Forex trading, commodity trading, managed futures, and other alternative investments are complex and carry a risk of substantial losses. As such, they are not suitable for all investors.
The mention of market based performance (i.e. Corn was up 5% today) reflects all available information as of the time and date of the publication.